The Best of the Best - DVDRW Drive

Well, the burned quality is just not there. What I meant by that
is the nero scan it usually comes out in low 90s (90~94) and I only burned it at 8x. With other burners like DW1640 or 1650 or PX716 they scan out to be at least mid to high 90s (95~98). I know the nero scan thing is bit overrated itself but I just dont think the Samsung 182 is great burner. I am not saying its worst burner out there, all i am saying is that its just not near the top.

 

What type of media were you using when you did these burns with the Samsung? Ever burn @ 4X instead of 8X? Also could you list what programs you were using? Just trying to get info on methods you used that gave you the best results for the SH-S182M. Thanks.

 

im looking at the Pioneer DVR-112D 18X DVD. has anyone gotten one of these orheard anything about them? is it compatible with the nero cd/dvd speed test? does it need the buffalo firmware to booktype also? thanks for any help/info.

 

I would definitely recommend the 112. It doesn't scan reliably (as always), but just pair it with a scanning drive. It is STILL probably the best BURNER (as far burn quality) out there. The Buffalo firmware is readily available (to booktype single layer +R).

I have my 112 paired with a Plex 760. I love it as much as my legendary 109!!! I also have a BenQ 1640, LG 4163, LiteOn 1693, and a LiteOn 160P6S. As far as strictly burn quality on quality +R AND -R media, I would rate Pioneer 1st, LG and BenQ tied at 2nd, then Plextor (because of OPC spikes on MCC004 media) and Lite Ons. If you factor in scanning ability, it changes to BenQ first, LiteOn 2nd, then Plextor (limited support for 3rd party utilities) then Pioneer and LG. As far as ripping speed, Plex 760- hands down, then BenQ, followed by LiteOn, then Pioneer and LG.

You just have to balance out which features are most important to you. But, as I started out saying, if you already have a scanning drive, then the Pioneer is an EXCELLENT choice!!!

EDIT: I neglected to mention, I use TY (in both formats) 95% of the time and the occassional Verb. With other media of varying quality, performance may differ, but I don't bother with anything less than the best! With quality media, ANY of the mentioned drives will perform beautifully. Just a few quality points here or there. I have had ZERO playback issues with quality media with any of my drives, and I am basing my ranking on pure numbers from the scanning that I have performed... Honestly, you wouldn't notice a difference from playback alone...

 

go to dangerous brothers page
booktyping and riplock is an easy "get around"

 

I just bumped into this thread. I am huge on SATA Hard Disks but what would be the advantage in a non high def SATA burner? I always burn at a conservitive rate. I guess it could improve the rip rate. I can already rip in 20 min, maybe it could cut that down to 5? I suspect the high def burners might put SATA to good use. Anyone have any facts?

 

As far as "non-high def" optical disc drives are concerned, SATA is no faster than IDE. The only advantage is "cleaner" cabling, but, you can always get rounded IDE cables... I'd be more concerned with SATA HDDs over ODDs.

 

I am currently using a SONY SL burner crossflashed to a LITE-ON DVDRW SOHW-832S DL burner.

Could I expect better burns with a genuine Lite-On DL burner?

 

Any answers for this post yet???

 

^ Well, I've had the best success using MCC-004 (Verbatim)...

 

@binkie7
There's no problem with picture & audio quality, but I did notice a couple or so momentary freezes from my last SL burn. This is with reference to playback on a set top player.
I need to check my last DL burn, haven't had a chance yet.

I use TY SL disks & Verbatim DL disks. I usually set the book type to DVD-ROM.

 

Setting the book type is just a compatibility thing that allows you to play on very old readers. It is good to do but will not help you with the quality of the recording. You produced a skippy disk which means something is not optimum. Media, surface quality, the burner and reader are the biggest factors there. You use good media. Do you hold the original up to the light to make sure it is perfectly clean? I usually use FixVTS. It makes for extra steps but I hate skippy disks. You need to rip the disk to video files run, FixVTS, then do what you need to do to put it on a disk. FixVTS assures a contigious flow of video. Then if the video is skippy it is either the media or the reader is not up to snuff the master on the hard disk had no skips. The lens needs cleaning after every few hundred disks less if you have kids that leave disks out to collect dust before they play them.